ANCHORAGE, Alaska – For years, the man known as Rafael Espinoza was widely respected as an exemplary police officer who was popular among his peers in Alaska's largest city.

All that ended this week when authorities discovered he was really Mexican national Rafael Mora-Lopez, who was in the U.S. illegally and stole another man's identity, officials charged.

Mew said the department conducted a pre-employment criminal background check on Mora-Lopez and he also passed a polygraph test. A national fingerprint check also turned up empty.

The arrest was a "bitter pill to swallow" for many in the police department, Mew said.

There are no immediate plans to file state charges, said John Skidmore, a state attorney. He and other officials stressed that the case was still under investigation.

The passport fraud case is similar to one involving a Mexican national who took the identity of a dead cousin who was a U.S. citizen in order to become a Milwaukee police officer. Oscar Ayala-Cornejo was deported to Mexico in 2007.

--------------------------------------------

In the comments section, it was pretty clear that I wasn't the only one making the Obama connection.

The part about no immediate plans to file state charges looks a lot like Hawaii. They just don't seem to care.
Posts: 7675 | Registered: Mar 2007
| IP: Logged |

posted April 23, 201106:53 PM
I'm not sure about the tea leaves, but the point is he passed the polygraph. He passed every test they threw at him to be a cop in good standing for many years. This doesn't do much to give people confidence in the abilities of our state governments to weed out frauds.

posted April 24, 201101:22 AM
I do like Malkin, and Coulter too but the sad fact is if we can't get any Republicans to go out in front on the birther issue, we may just have to settle for Trump.

I like Romney a lot but he says he "believes" and "thinks" Obama was born in Hawaii and that it's settled. That's just not good enough. He's out in my book. Too weak on the Constitution (or at least the one part of it that I apparently pretend to care about) to be trusted. That goes for any other non-birther.

This is another thing to be chagrined with Obama about. He's forcing us to vote for someone like Trump to find out about the truth about his deception. It's sad but the fact is if there were no Republicans at all who wanted to get down to the whole dirty truth and I believed a Democrat would do it, I'd vote for the Democrat. Single issue voter. There is absolutely no issue more important than this one. Of course, with Abercrombie as an example, any Democrat who made that promise couldn't be trusted to keep it anyway, but the point stands.

We need to find out the truth on this before we can move on as a country in any united way.
Posts: 7675 | Registered: Mar 2007
| IP: Logged |

posted April 24, 201101:27 AM
Cherry, the connection to Obama is completely self-serving, and the fact that other comments also made the same connection has no weight. If I cared to make the effort I could make a connection between almost any two unrelated events. Six degrees of separation between any news story and your favorite hot button issue really should only take two degrees at most, and won't actually indicate any substantive relationship at all. Obama having anything to do with a Mexican sheriff imposter in Alaska? I don't think so.
Posts: 8393 | Registered: Feb 2011
| IP: Logged |

posted April 24, 201105:29 AM
Yes, it shows that it's not that hard to fool state governments when it comes to documents. And that's assuming they even care, as one would expect that the state government of Alaska does when it comes to illegals serving as cops. I doubt Hawaii cared as much when it came to determining who was born there way back when, and if you read their laws it doesn't look like they make much of an effort to verify much of anything either.

If a state government can't catch an illegal alien trying to pass himself off as a citizen and a police officer, I doubt they'll catch a baby trying to pass himself off as a baby. People put way too much faith in their government. I'd rather see for myself thank you.
Posts: 7675 | Registered: Mar 2007
| IP: Logged |

posted April 24, 201107:41 AM
I never figured government corruption would turn out to be your crusade. Of course it starts and stops with Obama, or rather you could care less about corruption unless you can find a way to attach it to him. You are erecting a monumental edifice to hypocrisy that doesn't strike me as altogether unrelated to that of Pastor Jones.

Maybe he and Trump would be the dream ticket. To further cement the deal, Jones accidentally fired one of the two concealed handguns he brought to court the other day for his trial to get a permit for a peaceful protest in front of a Dearborn mosque. The man has as much style and class as Trump himself.

quote:Originally posted by cherrypoptart: Yes, it shows that it's not that hard to fool state governments when it comes to documents. And that's assuming they even care, as one would expect that the state government of Alaska does when it comes to illegals serving as cops. I doubt Hawaii cared as much when it came to determining who was born there way back when, and if you read their laws it doesn't look like they make much of an effort to verify much of anything either.

If a state government can't catch an illegal alien trying to pass himself off as a citizen and a police officer, I doubt they'll catch a baby trying to pass himself off as a baby. People put way too much faith in their government. I'd rather see for myself thank you.

So did that illegal immigrant in the other story do such a good job of fooling everyone that archivists in Hawaii verified his claim? How many court challenges did he successfully stand up to? Or is this perhaps an example of how it's just not that hard to fool small-town officialdom who never had any reason to double-check anything?

posted April 24, 201111:35 AM
The court challenges? You do realize that no court, no lawyer, no judge, no jury has ever looked at the original evidence or really any of the evidence at all concerning the Obama original long form birth certificate, right?

They've all been decided based on lack of jurisdiction and lack of standing. Correct me if I'm wrong on that.

Archivists in Hawaii haven't really verified that Obama was actually born in Hawaii. As even Tom agrees, they've verified that he may have "legally" been born in Hawaii in accordance with Hawaii's policies and procedures, and those allow for someone to have all the documentation that Obama has shown the public without the necessity of the formality of actually having been born in Hawaii. The documentation he won't have if he wasn't born in Hawaii is a long form birth certificate with a doctor's signature on it. It might be about time to check on that.

That's the thing. When you really start to look at the details the deception really starts to fall apart. Kind of like what it took to get this illegal cop, a careful examination of the details after someone had a suspicion that things just weren't adding up. Just a quick recap on two other points: the paperwork for the birth was apparently registered at a satellite office which absolutely would not be the case if Obama were born at either one of the two hospitals he is asserted to have been born in, and thousands of people have the same type of newspaper announcements even though they weren't born in Hawaii and many weren't even born in America at all. Fukino never said she saw a doctor's signature on a long form birth certificate, and she never said she knows the hospital name. She did however, let stand an interview in which when she talked about the original documents they were assumed to be the long form birth certificate. None of this adds up to Obama being born in either of the hospitals as has been described.

There's one other very good reason that we have to get to the bottom of this, no matter what it takes, even if it means electing "The Donald". Why? Everyone has their credibility on the line now. The President, the government of Hawaii, the media, the Republicans who let this pass without challenge, and of course the birthers. It's bad enough to call people crazy when they are crazy, but to do it as Fukino, Obama, the media, and even many Republicans have done and then have it turn out that there is no long form birth certificate with a doctor's signature on it is just too much. Somebody please help me with the word that describes such a situation.

Unless you really expect this deception to last for a lifetime, it might be time to start hedging your bets.
Posts: 7675 | Registered: Mar 2007
| IP: Logged |

quote:the paperwork for the birth was apparently registered at a satellite office which absolutely would not be the case if Obama were born at either one of the two hospitals he is asserted to have been born in

You've not provided ANY evidence for that. Someone just made a claim that you repeat without any evidence.

Same as you kept making a claim that Obama's lawyer SWORE there wasn't any stronger documentation, and you couldn't back that up either -- it was just a claim someone anonymous made in the internet, which you decided to repeat.

This makes you either a liar or a fool. My money's on the former.

quote:and thousands of people have the same type of newspaper announcements even though they weren't born in Hawaii and many weren't even born in America at all

You've not provided ANY evidence for that.

You only said that *perhaps* such evidence will be uncovered. Hypothetically in the future. According to some people in some other forums who say that such evidence will perhaps be one day uncovered.

Come on, give us the names of these thousands of people who had their birth announcements in Hawaai newspapers but were provably not born in Hawaai. I'm waiting. Or admit you're making stuff up.
Posts: 3318 | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged |

posted April 24, 201101:08 PM
Cherry if you're willing to nominate The Donald just because he's a birther and ignore everything else about him, you're kind of a whore. Read the Malkin ariticle if you haven't already.

Even if you WERE concerned about the Constitution (and you haven't budged on your, "if it keeps us safe from the terrorists, screw the Bill of Rights" so consider that argument ridiculous) Trump's position on Birtherism doesn't mean HE is. It just means he found something he can use to exploit people like you.

Romney's got other problems that are going to make it impossible to win.

What I want to know if if it came down to Obama vs Ron Paul what would you do?

posted April 24, 201101:55 PM
I think he stakes out his position based on whatever is emotionally apealing at any given time then makes his arguments accordingly. Even if I wasn't a Ron Paul fan watching the reversals of mainstream Conservatives and Neo-Cons would be almost enough to make me a single issue voter.

posted April 24, 201101:59 PM
Aris you should have access to the same 27 internets that I do. Look it up. If the information isn't on one of the ones you have over there, ask someone over here to look it up for you. But my understanding is that most of the internets have the same information available on them.

If you think I'm going to fly to Hawaii or go and personally interview the people who have the birth announcements in the papers but weren't born in Hawaii, you overestimate my power and how much free time I have on my hands. Hopefully these are issues that Trump's investigators are all over.

This is the purpose of the media. Dan Crosby has the evidence. He makes more sense than most of the others I've seen in the media who gloss over the details he's bringing up.

I like Ron Paul. Sometimes I live in Galveston and he's our hero over there. If it was a choice between Obama and Paul, I'd vote for Paul, but I can almost guarantee you that not enough other people would. There is no possible way that Paul would beat Obama. Trump might.

posted April 24, 201102:07 PM
Well everyone has to use their own judgment, obviously. I saw the same lawyerese and wiggle room in Fukino's statements though. I also notice she never said "original long form birth certificate". She also didn't confirm what Lingle said on the hospital, and she never mentioned that she saw an attending physician's signature on those documents.

If you want to go that route on evidence, unless y'all have been over to Hawaii with a power of attorney from Obama to look at his birth documents, you're all in the same boat as I am having to decide what you can trust on the internet and from the media, what you can't trust, and what is somewhere in the middle.
Posts: 7675 | Registered: Mar 2007
| IP: Logged |

posted April 24, 201102:17 PM
Cherry we have something called "primary elections" in this country. Trump just became a Republican, was pro-choice until a few months ago, made generous political donations to Democrats for decades, went into bankrupcy repeatedly, manipulated the government to force people out of their homes, and is a repeated adulterer. He also isn't actually offering any new ideas, just the old ideas more intensely. I'd be very surprised if he makes it past New Hampshire and Iowa.

Ron Paul's son Rand Paul just defeated establishment candidates from both parties, both of them running on the established arguments and in the former case with the entire GOP establishment against him.

I think that Paul actually could beat Obama, particularly if he can outflank the MSM attempts to slander him. (Which Rand Paul was unable to do and he STILL won.)

Ron Paul may be a local hero, but you've been arguing AGAINST many of his signature position for years. Are you really willing to risk putting the Constitution ahead of security concerns? I don't believe it.

(I really need to use the preview before I post. I can't type worth a darn.)

And the link you provided just makes some random claims again. I know you like to link to it, but that's just APPLAUSE LIGHTS. It doesn't say anything. It doesn't back up its claims. It doesn't provide evidence. It's just NOISE, meant to overwhelm us with the NOISY NOISE.

You say that things don't add up, but you don't even have the "things". You just hope that'll hopefully you'll one day have things that'll hopefully won't add up.

quote:the fact is the best evidence is the original long form birth certificate

Why? It is, like the short form birth certificate, merely prima facie evidence of Obama's birth in Hawaii. What makes the long form "better," in your opinion -- an opinion, mind, that courts do not share?

quote:As even Tom agrees, they've verified that he may have "legally" been born in Hawaii in accordance with Hawaii's policies and procedures, and those allow for someone to have all the documentation that Obama has shown the public without the necessity of the formality of actually having been born in Hawaii.

No. Please don't miscite me. I agree that the short form and other documents verify that Obama is considered by the law to have been born in Hawaii. I do not grant that someone might have all the documentation that Obama has shown the public without the "formality" of being born in Hawaii; that is not merely a formality, as you know, since it would require either forgery or fraud to obtain a short form cert under those circumstances.

Note that it would also require forgery and/or fraud to obtain a long-form cert without being born in Hawaii.

posted April 24, 201108:18 PM
The long form has the name and signature of the attending physician and the hospital of birth.

Obama may have documents that lack this information and that could indicate either a non-hospital birth such as a home birth or birth somewhere besides Hawaii.

Yes, having the long form without being born in Hawaii probably would require fraud because someone would have to forge the doctor's signature.

But, the short form that Obama has could have been applied for on merely the word of the parents or grandparents, people who are all dead now so who are you going to question?

And that's fine as far as it goes. If that's the type of birth certificate he has, it doesn't prove he wasn't born in Hawaii. It just indicates he wasn't born in a hospital in Hawaii, and it means we've been mislead.

I'm pretty sure you had insisted, correctly, that the government of Hawaii determines who was born in Hawaii for legal purposes regardless of where in the world they were actually born. However, the eligibility for the Presidency may or may not rest with Hawaiian law if that law contradicts the Constitution. It may rest with Hawaiian law though. It's a gray area that needs exploration, contemplation, and resolution.
Posts: 7675 | Registered: Mar 2007
| IP: Logged |

quote:But, the short form that Obama has could have been applied for on merely the word of the parents or grandparents, people who are all dead now so who are you going to question?

No, the short form that he presented just indicates that he ordered a reprint of the information. It suggests nothing either way about the secondary information that isn't part of what Hawaii considers relevant and economical, or of any business to anyone but a legitimate historian or genealogy researcher to include on the document that it issues when people request a new copy.

quote:Originally posted by cherrypoptart: The court challenges? You do realize that no court, no lawyer, no judge, no jury has ever looked at the original evidence or really any of the evidence at all concerning the Obama original long form birth certificate, right?

In fact, they've never looked at the original long-form birth certificate of ANY elected representative from Hawaii, since apparently the short-form is all they need. So theoretically every federal politician who claims Hawaiian birth could in fact be a foreigner, since the only "proof" of their birthplace that they used to qualify for citizenship was their short-form birth certificate. COULD IT BE THAT EVERY SO-CALLED "HAWAIIAN-BORN" POLITICIAN IS IN FACT PART OF A DASTARDLY PLOT TO FLOOD AMERICAN POLITICS WITH KENYAN DOUBLE AGENTS?!?!?!
Posts: 503 | Registered: Oct 2010
| IP: Logged |

posted April 25, 201109:28 PM
Cherry, it turns out that Trump has now learned that Obama was a fraud as a student, as well. I hope you're not going to let this go:

quote:"I heard he was a terrible student, terrible," Trump told the AP. "How does a bad student go to Columbia and then to Harvard? I'm thinking about it, I'm certainly looking into it. Let him show his records."

Mr. Obama received an undergraduate degree in political science from Columbia University in 1983, after transferring from Occidental College in 1981. He went on to study law at Harvard Law School , where he was named the first black president of the Harvard Law Review. He graduated magna cum laude in 1991.

Trump provided no evidence of Mr. Obama's "terrible" marks, but did offer the fact that "I have friends who have smart sons with great marks, great boards, great everything and they can't get into Harvard."

posted April 25, 201109:36 PM
I read that and yes I was going to let it go actually. I have wondered about Obama's school record as well. So much has been sealed that about all we know regarding how much or how well Obama learned in school is that he at least learned how to read a teleprompter. Very. Very. Slowly. With lots of pauses.

It would be really cool to actually see the teleprompter script and the pacing as he reads it. It literally says, "Let me make one thing clear... wait for it, wait for it, WAIT FOR IT... now is the time..."

There is a separate line of questioning regarding Obama's citizenship stemming from his Indonesia student status and if he, or really his parents, lied about him being an Indonesian citizen so he could attend school there or what. I don't buy into that line of questioning just because I'm not sure it's going anywhere. There are other questions involving possible fraud concerning Obama receiving financial aid as a foreign student, but I don't see that affecting his natural born citizenship either. The same thing applies with his Selective Service registration.

It's all very interesting, and we know very little about any of it for sure. It may just take unraveling one or just a few threads in his web of lies to unravel the mystery of it all. It's only a matter of time.
Posts: 7675 | Registered: Mar 2007
| IP: Logged |

posted April 25, 201109:43 PM
"It would be really cool to actually see the teleprompter script and the pacing as he reads it. It literally says, "Let me make one thing clear... wait for it, wait for it, WAIT FOR IT... now is the time...""

Yep, I've never met a magna cum laude who was worth a damn myself... .

"It may just take unraveling one or just a few threads in his web of lies to unravel the mystery of it all."

And if it turns out to be a web of truth?
Posts: 8393 | Registered: Feb 2011
| IP: Logged |

posted April 25, 201109:49 PM
If it's all a solid web of truth used to snare conservatives in a trap of their own xenophobic paranoia, that will be good to know so we can all just move on and stop wasting our lives on this nonsense. Posts: 7675 | Registered: Mar 2007
| IP: Logged |

posted April 25, 201109:56 PM
Um, I have many times suggested that to you already. It costs you nothing to let it go, but it could cost you a *lot* if you keep flogging it. You've said many times that it would be worth it, but it's hard to imagine that would be so.
Posts: 8393 | Registered: Feb 2011
| IP: Logged |

posted April 25, 201110:23 PM
If Obama is ineligible to be President, that would be the coolest thing ever. Just imagine the chaos. Would Kagin and Sotomayor have to step down from the Supreme Court? And that's just for starters. The implications would be huge and it would make all of our lives so much more interesting. Then there's also that little issue of the Constitution wouldn't be getting violated, really when you think about it literally raped by Obama, for all the years to follow, perhaps until everyone involved is long dead, including the Constitution which was literally brutally murdered, and nothing at all can be done to fix the situation.

Yes, I love it too when people use the word literally in precisely the wrong way. Hannity does it all the time and it always makes me laugh. Congress literally has the American automobile industry and all of the Wall Street bankers in the palm of its hand.
Posts: 7675 | Registered: Mar 2007
| IP: Logged |

posted April 25, 201110:26 PM
Cherry, Do you really think a constitutional crisis that could shake the stability of our society to the core would be cool? Are you being sarcastic or serious?
Posts: 1121 | Registered: May 2004
| IP: Logged |

posted April 25, 201110:43 PM
If the Constitution is being violated, do you think we should continue to let it get violated in order to avoid a Constitutional crisis?

Our ignorance of its violation doesn't mean it isn't being violated. If a woman (or a man) is raped but nobody hears her (or him) scream for help that doesn't mean she (or he) isn't being raped.

If it's not getting violated, then there is nothing to worry about by making sure. No matter how many back alleys we have to investigate, we can't just ignore those suspicious sounds we hear. We wouldn't be good citizens if we did.

If it is getting violated, experiencing the Constitutional crisis that comes from stopping that violation is infinitely preferable to allowing that violation to continue even if we remain ignorant of it.

It would be cool both in the sense of being very exciting as well as in the sense of justifying the birther crusade and most importantly cool in the sense of saving the Constitution from violation.

Or for Aris and Viking and others who appreciate the racism in these personal attacks against Obama, it's important to at least save the one part of the Constitution we care about from violation by the one person we refuse to let violate it in just that particular way. We don't care if various people violate our precious belle here and here and here, but not there. Oh dear lord, please just not there. And not him. Above all else by all that's pure in the world, please not by him.

posted April 25, 201110:50 PM
I can accept your argument that in your opinion the significant costs associated with thoroughly our government into chaos would be worth preserving the constitution. I think you are crazy for thinking such a crisis would be cool. There would be significant economic and political costs that could last for decades. There are scenarios where multiple people (Biden, McCain or Boehner) could claim the presidency in ways that could lead to a civil war or some form of marshal law. If you think the costs are worth it to defend the constitution fine but there is nothing cool about potentially ripping the fabric of our society.
Posts: 1121 | Registered: May 2004
| IP: Logged |

quote:Originally posted by cherrypoptart: If it's all a solid web of truth used to snare conservatives in a trap of their own xenophobic paranoia, that will be good to know so we can all just move on and stop wasting our lives on this nonsense.

posted April 25, 201110:58 PM
Seriously though Yossarian, you are correct that it would not be pretty, or nice. But if our Constitution was really violated at this highest level and there is a cover-up on this massive a scale, the fabric of our society is already ripped. Exposing it is the only way to put it back together.

If there is a fraud of this magnitude being perpetuated against the American people, and we let it continue, indeed we send the message to our government that we are perfectly fine with feigning ignorance and indulging them as they dupe us so blatantly, then our society is already doomed. It will only get worse and we will be destroyed from within the shadows. Sometimes the torch lights of the villagers are the only thing that can save them from the monsters hiding in the darkness.
Posts: 7675 | Registered: Mar 2007
| IP: Logged |

posted April 25, 201111:10 PM
Cherry if the birthers turn out to be making things up that makes birthers the perpetuators of a vast fraud to undermine a legitimate election. Assisination by other means. That would also be an assault on the American people.